The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1887-01-22
Nm the Jury Room.
N. Quad, in Detroit Free Press.

N. Quad, an Detroit Free Press.
| The case seemed clear enough to a
boy ten years old.
The plaintiff sued the defendant on
debt. The defendant admitted that
he contracted the debt, and that he had
never paid it. He tried to show, as an
offset, that he once lent the plaintiff
some money, but he failed even to es-
tablish the date of the transaction. The
amount sued for was $4oo, and the Judge
charged us to return verdict in favor
of the plaintiff.
When we got settled in the jury room
and elected foreman, he said:
'Well, I suppose we must return a
verdict for the full amount?'
well, I don't!' replied one of the
jurors-a man whom 1 had selected as
an honest, conscientious juror.
'But isn't it plain case2'
mo, sir The plaintiff had two law
yefs, while the defendant had but one.
There was nothing fair about that!'
'But the judge charged us to return a
verdict for the amount observed an
other juror.
'Sposing he did?' exclaimed an old
man on the left; 'if the judge knows
more about this case than we do then
what are we here for?'
(Which of 'em was the plaintiff, any,
how2' solemnly inquired solemn juror,
whom I had seen sleeping through most
of the trial.
The red-headed man, of course, re-
piled a young man who wore very tight
pantaloons and chewed plug tobacco
with great ambition.
'Was it! Why l thought it was the
fat mani exclaimed juror No. 6.
The foreman suggested that we mark
on slips of paper the amount each juror
thought the plaintiff entitled to. His
suggestion was followed, and the amounts
run from fifteen cents to the S4oo.
1T seems to me- he reflected, 'that
r77s 7c fcudant either owes him $500 or
nothing
Il don't believe he owes him nuthin','
replied one of the twelve.
But you heard the evidence
Hang the evidenceI'
Some one suggested that we add up
the sums marked and strike an average.
Another suggested that we return a
verdict for the defendant.
A third offered to flip cent and head
or tail for the S4oo or nothing.
A fourth wanted some one to tell him
if the debt hadn't been outlawed.
1t was finally discovered that we stood
five for the plaintiff and seven for the
defendant and the foreman wanted to
know what we should do.
well, said one of the seven, 'if we
agree with you in this case will you agree
with us in the next?'
He couldn't promise, and the leader
of the dissenters declared that he would
remain in that room lifetime before he
would agree with the five.
At the end of an hour there were eight
men willing to return verdict for SIS.
At the end of two hours there were
seven men who didn't care cent, and
five who were in favor of the defendant.
At the end of three hours six men
were in favor of S4oo, and the other six
were playing poker.
In another hour two of us favored
S4oo and the other ten had made up
their minds that at least two out of the
three lawyers ought to be in Jail. We
finally marched in with the announce
ment that we couldn't agree, when the
juror who didn't know plaintiff from
defendant raised his voice and protested:
Judge, we could have agreed all right
if anybody had told us what the case
was about think we orter be fur
nished with diagrams!'